Structural Engineers getting slammed II 9

[LPPE]

An additional $0.02 - Maybe adding more hours or classes to an engineering curiculum (in which to get my BS in engineering i had to have over 20 more credit hours than any othe major at my school needed to get a bachelors...), maybe the way the classes are taught would help.

For instance, take an example out of a basic steel design course. The problem will say "Design a beam spaning 25 feet uniformly loaded with 3 kips/ft". Why not make the problem "Design a typical floor beam spanning 25 feet in an office at 10'-0" center to center spacings". That way at least it would force the students to get familiar with the building code and figuring out live loads, dead loads, etc.

 

[SacreBleu]

LPPE
Exactly correct. Also, ask for the girder design, so that they would get the bending moment correct for once. A girder with 2, 3, or 4 beams equally spaced, framed to it should not be designed as uniformly loaded.
In contrast, a wood glulam beam (girder) for a house is designed as uniformly loaded because there isn't 2000 LF of girder to save money on, and wood design includes much higher Factors of Safety.

 

[swine]

This thread is disturbing and narrow-minded.

Thankfully, the architects are in charge.

 

[TFL]

LPPE,

the reason profs do not write the questions as you say is becasue 99% of profs at university have never really designed anything in their lives. they are not rewared for being good teachers or for having experiance designing. they are rewarded for being researchers; which are essentially scientists not engineers.

so the net effect is you have scientist trying to teach people be to be engineers which they reaaly are not themselves.

Swine,

if you are going to call a conversation narrow monded please expound on you thoughs and provide some basis for you statement

 

[SacreBleu]

TFL,
Many of my professors had short-lived jobs in the real world. They generally made very negative remarks about their experience there. The professors who had no job experience at all were much more comfortable as professors.

That is not to say they were poor professors. Most were good at laying the theoretical foundations.

 

[CEGG]

I'm an ArchE from Oklahoma State. Its basically a structural engineering course with a bunch of design work thrown in. Looking back it at - the program is a joke (I thought it was worthwhile at the time). While I do appreciate a better understanding of the arch. design process, I could have learned about this without the uselessness of college arch. design.

I think the university Arch. programs are to blame for the general stupidity of architects. They push students to coe up with the least practical, far-out, and just plain wacky designs - as long as they have a 'concept'. They then graduate with no practical architectural experience and no idea how to really put a building together. Most arch. students I graduated with couldn't care less about the engineering classes and, in fact, copied the majority of the homework from the engineering students...

Pray like everything depends on God
Work like everything depends on you.

 

[swine]

Okay,
So, who is to blame for the general stupidity of engineers?

 

[JAE]

Breweries?

 

[CEGG]

Electro-magnetic radiation from the plethora of gadgets an engineer has hanging from his clothing at any given moment?

Pray like everything depends on God
Work like everything depends on you.

 

[EddyC]

swine,

I think that engineers are the shining stars of the universe as far as intelligence goes. I am continually amazed at the lack of intelligence that the general public has regarding almost any issue. And I'm from an urban area where people are usually a bit more intelligent than average. I'm beginning to think that stupidity is being bred on purpose.

 

[SacreBleu]

EddyC,
I totally agree. It is being caused by too much "reality-show" programming on the stupido-vision.

 

[MikeT14]

CEGG,

I have to agree with your comments regarding the education of architects. The architecture school at my university pushed CONCEPT CONCEPT CONCEPT!!! Practical knowledge was secondary to the ART of architecture. The profs in the architecture school emphasized this to a fault. They would reward crazy designs that had no chance of being built over the practical, and still exciting, designs. That only rewards the dreamers and salesmen, not the practitioners.

This is th example I give to illustrate my point: While working as a student assistant at the architecture library, I had a sophmore or junior level architecture student ask me if there was a book describing how to put brick on a ceiling . . . Somehow I don't think I would feel very safe in that building.

 

[SacreBleu]

Getting back to the OP, I feel that Architects should be totally prohibited from practicing Structural Engineering.
It is very common, at least in my area, for an architect to provide structural engineering for the gravity framing (beams, headers, posts) of a custom house structure. The methods (and sizes they come up with)use are of great concern to me.
They expect me to do only the shearwall analysis. This is because the Plans Check Dept (poor misguided souls) require an Engineer stamp on the shear wall design only.

 

[jike]

SacreBleu:

Are the architects, that you work for, capable of doing the other lateral members that feed the shear walls? For example:

Diaphragm, chords, collectors, drag struts, eave blocking, truss holdowns, gable end truss bracing, etc.

I would be careful because you may get sucked into a lawsuit involving the structural integrity if they are unqualified to handle the whole design. I

 

[SacreBleu]

jike,
All of the elements you mention are taken care of by myself.

 

[Qshake]

One thing that drew me into the original article that I read and posted here was that in Illinois which has an SE license, it is entirely OK for them to seal our work but not OK for us to seal theirs. Not that I want to by any stretch of the imagination. But I think this is an ill-fated political point on the part of architects, not to mention arrogant, that they can seal our plans. Why?

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[TPNY]

After reading so many responses on this very popular topic, I thought I'd take a minute to put my two cents in. In my very early experience as an engineer, I had the unpleasant task of retrieving the architects plans and delivering them to the permit office for my construction company (I guess I was still paying my "dues" at the time). The architect looked me in the eye and told me how to meet what he thought was the required fire-rating for this renovation project, etc (long story, which I won't discuss here). Being a natural skeptic-- and one who has too much time to read a lot of ambiguous code literature-- I wasn't sold on his advice. He was offended by my non-compliance and condescendingly accused me of having inside connections at the permit office. I don't, and as it turned out the permit went through one week later... I've been slightly jaded ever since then about the unnecessary competition between engineers and architects. Can't we all just get along?

 

[DJYork]

A few years ago in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area a building was destroyed by high wind. However, it was the only building to be even remotely harmed, and guess what type of profession designed it w/o a structural engineer.

Also, I am an architecture reject and smartened up and switched to Structures, but before I left I read a book by Le Corbusier named "Towards a New Architecture," and in this book Le Corbusier (a very famous architect) said the next great architects would be engineers, because for many reasons, one being engineers keep things simple, and do not try to over design the most mundane aspects. Thought that was interesting when comparing the two professional fields.

 

[SacreBleu]

In the course of designing and building construction, I, as a structural engineer, first deal with the architect. Typically, he/she is a snotty, arrogant twerp, totally divorced from reality. They are usually young, inexperienced, but know all the latest buzzwords.
During the construction phase, I am dealing with the shop detailers, superintendents, etc. Entirely different mindset. In the background, I hear the constant whine of Mr. Peachfuzz Archie, constantly complaining that he wasn't kept copied on the RFI's (I guess our Office Manager forgets that occasionally).

 

[whyun]

One of my pet-peeve is the architect who doesn't recognize which discipline should review a submittal issued by the contractor. One time, I received a submittal forwarded to me by an architect related to the COLOR of grout in a masonry wall construction.

I have a feeling that they don't even LOOK to see what it is! Common solution for most is "Send it to the structural. They will sort out everything." Our fees are not enough to do all of THEIR work!

I do recognize that there are some very competent and respectful architects out there... but was it you, SacreBleu, who said 98% of the bad ones make the other 2% look bad? It is true with the architectural profession just the same.